Not a government sitenlrb.fyi is an independent project. It is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or operated by the National Labor Relations Board or any government agency. The Board's own site is at nlrb.gov.

AT&T Mobility

556 cases in this site's copy of the record · 9 of those 556 are marked open by the Board · Region 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 09, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 25, 27, 28, 29, 31, 32 · ASHLAND, KY; Aberdeen, NC; Abilene, TX; Albany, NY; Albemarle, NC; Albuquerque, NM and more

Each case links to the Board's own docket page. This site holds what the Board listed, not the documents.

What kinds of case

Type	What it is	Here
CA	Charge against an employer	545
RC	Petition for an election	7
RD	Petition to decertify	4

The cases

Page 4 of 4, newest first: 1 2 3 4

Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 25 March 2010Case 21-CA-039285ClosedCommerce, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 40
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 23 March 2010Case 11-CA-022620ClosedGreensboro, NCRegion 10Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 16 March 2010Case 11-CA-022610ClosedGreensboro, NCRegion 10Workers in the unit 10
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 8 March 2010Case 07-CA-052777ClosedWestland, MIRegion 07Workers in the unit 300
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 16 February 2010Case 19-CA-032363ClosedRedmond, WARegion 19Workers in the unit 500
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 14 January 2010Case 09-CA-045399ClosedGrayson, KYRegion 09Workers in the unit 500
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 12 January 2010Case 32-CA-024898ClosedAtwater, CARegion 32Workers in the unit 700
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 4 January 2010Case 19-CA-032292ClosedTukwila, WARegion 19Workers in the unit 350
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 28 December 2009Case 32-CA-024867ClosedAtwater, CARegion 32Workers in the unit 700
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 16 December 2009Case 17-CA-024749ClosedOverland Park, KSRegion 14Workers in the unit 12
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 16 December 2009Case 09-CA-045371ClosedWashington, DCRegion 09Workers in the unit 45,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 16 December 2009Case 05-CA-035475ClosedWashington, DCRegion 05Workers in the unit 45,000
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 25 November 2009Case 24-CA-011407ClosedSan Juan, PRRegion 12Workers in the unit 685
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 27 October 2009Case 21-CA-039068ClosedSan Diego, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 92
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 30 September 2009Case 11-CA-022454ClosedGreensboro, NCRegion 10Workers in the unit 1,500
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 22 September 2009Case 11-CA-022440ClosedGreensboro, NCRegion 10Workers in the unit 600
Petition for an election
RC
Filed 2 September 2009Case 19-RC-015237ClosedWasilla, AKRegion 19Workers in the unit 82
Included: All Retail Sales Consultants and Financial Cell Tower Technicians from Ketchikan to Wasilla, Alaska. Excluded: All other employees not already represented by IBEW Local 1547.
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 19 August 2009Case 34-CA-012432ClosedRocky Hill, CTRegion 01
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 13 August 2009Case 22-CA-029060ClosedParamus, NJRegion 22Workers in the unit 1,000
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 6 August 2009Case 05-CA-035140ClosedBowie, MDRegion 05Workers in the unit 400
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 27 July 2009Case 05-CA-035130ClosedWashington, DCRegion 05Workers in the unit 45,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 14 July 2009Case 15-CA-019133ClosedPensacola, FLRegion 15Workers in the unit 8
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 10 July 2009Case 14-CA-029808ClosedBallwin, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 10 July 2009Case 14-CA-029807ClosedBallwin, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 10 July 2009Case 14-CA-029806ClosedBallwin, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 10 July 2009Case 14-CA-029805ClosedBallwin, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 10 July 2009Case 14-CA-029804ClosedBallwin, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 10 July 2009Case 14-CA-029803ClosedBallwin, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 10 July 2009Case 14-CA-029802ClosedBallwin, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 10 July 2009Case 14-CA-029801ClosedBallwin, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 10 July 2009Case 14-CA-029800ClosedBallwin, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 10 July 2009Case 14-CA-029799ClosedBallwin, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 7 July 2009Case 12-CA-026408ClosedMiami, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 1,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 17 June 2009Case 25-CA-031040ClosedIndianapolis, INRegion 25Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 10 June 2009Case 11-CA-022323ClosedGreenville, SCRegion 10Workers in the unit 25
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 4 June 2009Case 33-CA-015823ClosedRantoul, ILRegion 25
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 4 June 2009Case 33-CA-015822ClosedRantoul, ILRegion 25
Petition for an election
RC
Filed 3 June 2009Case 24-RC-008641ClosedChristiansted, VIRegion 12Workers in the unit 9
Included: All part-time and full time Retail Sales Consultant, Sale Support Representative employed by the employer on St. Croix. Excluded: All other employees, confidential employees, guards and supervisors as defined by the Act.
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 2 June 2009Case 04-CA-036819ClosedHarrisburg, PARegion 04Workers in the unit 100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 29 May 2009Case 32-CA-024574ClosedAtwater, CARegion 32Workers in the unit 30,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 11 May 2009Case 22-CA-028893ClosedMorristown, NJRegion 22Workers in the unit 1,000,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 20 April 2009Case 16-CA-026727ClosedAbilene, TXRegion 16Workers in the unit 22
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 6 April 2009Case 27-CA-021194ClosedAurora, CORegion 27Workers in the unit 100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 6 April 2009Case 27-CA-021193ClosedDenver, CORegion 27Workers in the unit 100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 13 March 2009Case 06-CA-036383ClosedPittsburgh, PARegion 06Workers in the unit 10
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 27 February 2009Case 28-CA-022373ClosedLas Vegas, NVRegion 28Workers in the unit 6,600
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 27 February 2009Case 28-CA-022372ClosedLas Vegas, NVRegion 28Workers in the unit 6,600
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 11 February 2009Case 05-CA-034752ClosedRichmond, VARegion 05Workers in the unit 45,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 9 February 2009Case 11-CA-022193ClosedGreensboro, NCRegion 10Workers in the unit 800
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 9 February 2009Case 05-CA-034745ClosedRichmond, VARegion 05Workers in the unit 45,000
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 30 January 2009Case 03-CA-027008ClosedJamestown, NYRegion 03Workers in the unit 20,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 29 January 2009Case 36-CA-010406ClosedPortland, ORRegion 19Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 29 January 2009Case 36-CA-010405ClosedPortland, ORRegion 19Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 8 January 2009Case 12-CA-026150ClosedBoca Raton, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 1,000
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 7 January 2009Case 37-CA-007690ClosedHonolulu, HIRegion 20Workers in the unit 1,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 29 December 2008Case 12-CA-026140ClosedMiami, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 1,000
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 29 December 2008Case 10-CA-037675ClosedNorcross, GARegion 10Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 17 December 2008Case 11-CA-022151ClosedGreensboro, NCRegion 10Workers in the unit 800
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 22 October 2008Case 16-CA-026461ClosedSan Antonio, TXRegion 16Workers in the unit 50
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 26 September 2008Case 16-CA-026422ClosedPlano, TXRegion 16Workers in the unit 1,500
at&t Mobility
CA
Filed 24 September 2008Case 32-CA-024131ClosedAtwater, CARegion 32Workers in the unit 800
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 27 August 2008Case 19-CA-031508ClosedBothell, WARegion 19Workers in the unit 1,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 27 August 2008Case 16-CA-026388ClosedFarmers Branch, TXRegion 16Workers in the unit 560
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 7 August 2008Case 11-CA-022027ClosedGreensboro, NCRegion 10Workers in the unit 900
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 6 August 2008Case 22-CA-028478ClosedParamus, NJRegion 22Workers in the unit 10,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 28 July 2008Case 27-CA-020943ClosedEnglewood, CORegion 27Workers in the unit 100
At&T Mobility
CA
Filed 3 July 2008Case 29-CA-029068ClosedHicksville, NYRegion 29Workers in the unit 100,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 10 June 2008Case 19-CA-031407ClosedBothell, WARegion 19Workers in the unit 1,100
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 12 May 2008Case 22-CA-028363ClosedParamus, NJRegion 22Workers in the unit 100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 9 May 2008Case 01-CA-044637ClosedDover, NHRegion 01Workers in the unit 309,050
Petition to decertify
RD
Filed 5 May 2008Case 04-RD-002140ClosedNew Castle, DERegion 04Workers in the unit 7
All Technician II Cell, Technician II Switch, Technician III Cell and Technician III Switch employees employed by the employer at its 65 Southgate Boulevard facility.
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 10 April 2008Case 21-CA-038311ClosedCerritos, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 30,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 9 April 2008Case 21-CA-038305ClosedSan Ramon, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 30,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 9 April 2008Case 21-CA-038304ClosedCerritos, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 20,000
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 2 April 2008Case 28-CA-021856ClosedLas Vegas, NVRegion 28Workers in the unit 153
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 1 April 2008Case 18-CA-018720ClosedMinnetonka, MNRegion 18Workers in the unit 175
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 28 March 2008Case 12-CA-025806ClosedMiami, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 1,000
Petition to decertify
RD
Filed 21 March 2008Case 09-RD-002170ClosedLexington, KYRegion 09Workers in the unit 318
Included: All retail sales consultants, senior retail sales consultants and sales support representatives employed by the Employer at Company-owned retail locations within the State of Kentucky Excluded: All other office clerical employees, professional employees, guards and supervisors as defined in the Act.
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 17 March 2008Case 12-CA-025784ClosedBoca Raton, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 1,000
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 13 March 2008Case 12-CA-025780ClosedBoca Raton, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 1,000
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 3 March 2008Case 12-CA-025767ClosedBoca Raton, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 1,000
AT&T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 26 February 2008Case 25-CA-030615ClosedIndianapolis, INRegion 25Workers in the unit 250
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 22 February 2008Case 16-CA-026055ClosedLubbock, TXRegion 16Workers in the unit 7,000
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 11 February 2008Case 10-CA-037233ClosedNorcross, GARegion 10Workers in the unit 200
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 11 February 2008Case 10-CA-037232ClosedNorcross, GARegion 10Workers in the unit 200
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 24 January 2008Case 12-CA-025710ClosedJacksonville, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 150
At & T Mobility
CA
Filed 24 January 2008Case 12-CA-025709ClosedJacksonville, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 150
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 15 January 2008Case 16-CA-026005ClosedAustin, TXRegion 16Workers in the unit 7,500
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 7 January 2008Case 16-CA-025993ClosedLubbock, TXRegion 16Workers in the unit 7,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 7 January 2008Case 16-CA-025992ClosedLubbock, TXRegion 16Workers in the unit 7,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 7 January 2008Case 16-CA-025989ClosedAustin, TXRegion 16Workers in the unit 7,500
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 6 December 2007Case 12-CA-025656ClosedJacksonville, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 150
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 27 November 2007Case 32-CA-023647ClosedAtwater, CARegion 32Workers in the unit 850
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 19 November 2007Case 22-CA-028135ClosedParamus, NJRegion 22Workers in the unit 1,900
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 6 November 2007Case 19-CA-031118ClosedBothell, WARegion 19Workers in the unit 1,100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 24 October 2007Case 16-CA-025882ClosedMidland, TXRegion 16Workers in the unit 450
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 24 September 2007Case 22-CA-028083ClosedParamus, NJRegion 22Workers in the unit 1,900
at & t Mobility
CA
Filed 13 September 2007Case 07-CA-050670ClosedLivonia, MIRegion 07Workers in the unit 300
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 28 August 2007Case 25-CA-030443ClosedIndianapolis, INRegion 25Workers in the unit 300
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 15 August 2007Case 25-CA-030424ClosedIndianapolis, INRegion 25Workers in the unit 300
AT&T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 13 August 2007Case 25-CA-030419ClosedINDIANAPOLIS, INRegion 25Workers in the unit 300
AT&T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 13 August 2007Case 25-CA-030418ClosedIndianapolis, INRegion 25Workers in the unit 300
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 9 August 2007Case 16-CA-025733ClosedAustin, TXRegion 16Workers in the unit 900
AT & T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 18 July 2007Case 25-CA-030393ClosedIndianapolis, INRegion 25Workers in the unit 300
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 17 July 2007Case 12-CA-025490ClosedJacksonville, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 150
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 9 March 2001Case 06-CA-031949ClosedPittsburgh, PARegion 06Workers in the unit 300

Page 4 of 4, newest first: 1 2 3 4

Last refreshed 19 September 2026. What is in it, and what is not.

The Labor Board FYI is independent, and is not the Board or any government agency. Where a number here disagrees with the Board's, the Board is right: tell us at [email protected]. If a name here is a private person and not a business or a union, write to the same address and it comes off. Where this comes from.